Dennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to address the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 and the Fisheries Levy Amendment Bill 2007. Who can forget the Antarctic chase in August 2003 when Australian, British and South African vessels cornered a ship, registered in Uruguay, accused of poaching patagonian toothfish in Australian waters? The crew of the Australian patrol boat Southern Supporter endured massive seas and appallingly dangerous conditions to follow the Viarsa through icy waters for an amazing 20 days before the dramatic chase ended with the capture of that vessel. And who can forget the ongoing work done by Australian patrols in the waters off the Kimberley and the Northern Territory? In July last year a total of seven Indonesian fishing vessels carrying 67 crew were detained after a coastal surveillance flight discovered the type-3 ice boats early in the morning. Although five of the boats tried to evade capture, they were boarded successfully by sailors from HMAS Dubbo and HMAS Success. In all, the vessels were found to be carrying more than 4,000 kilograms of reef fish.

Illegal fishing within Australia has been a problem, with illegal fishers appearing too often in local courts charged with poaching. For example, three men who were convicted in the Rockingham courthouse south of Perth were ordered to pay almost $19,000 in fines and forfeit a large quantity of abalone, an aluminium dinghy, a 15-horsepower outboard engine, a fuel tank and two handspears. In fact, recently a fairly prominent WA Labor member of parliament was apprehended for doing much the same thing. The Howard government has moved decisively to tackle both fish poaching and overfishing in Australian waters. As a result of the Australian government’s tough approach, sightings of foreign fishing vessels in Australia’s northern waters in 2006 were down over 40 per cent compared with the number in 2005, despite an increase in surveillance flights. In addition, a record 365 vessels were apprehended and destroyed. This trend continues in 2007, with sightings in the first few months of the year down 68 per cent compared with in 2006.

On the domestic front, this year’s total allowable catch set by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority as a result of a ministerial direction in late 2005 will see wild catches brought within scientifically sustainable levels. Improvements to the management of Australian fisheries will continue under the Howard government.

In summary, the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 will amend the Fisheries Management Act 1991, the Fisheries Administration Act 1991, the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 and the Surveillance Devices Act 2004. In conjunction with the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2007, the Fisheries Levy Amendment Bill 2007 will amend the Fisheries Levy Act 1984. Together, these amendments will: improve the management of the Torres Strait and Commonwealth fisheries; combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; better monitor fishing activities within Commonwealth jurisdiction fisheries; and facilitate a whole-of-government approach to law enforcement. Overall, the suite of changes will ensure that the Australian government is equipped with more robust enforcement, compliance, administrative and fisheries management tools.

In relation to the background of these two bills, they primarily focus on amending the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 to ensure that the Torres Strait fisheries can be managed consistently with contemporary Australian government fisheries policies and to better position Australia to meet its rights and obligations under the Torres Strait Treaty with Papua New Guinea. The key amendments are: firstly, to the Fisheries Administration Act 1991 and the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 to clarify the role of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority in the management of these fisheries; and, secondly, to the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 to improve the management of rights and obligations under the treaty. The Torres Strait Protected Zone Joint Authority is developing management plans for the three commercial fisheries and establishing a total allowable catch, or total allowable effort, in each fishery. This will better enable Australia to allocate a share of the catch or effort to PNG, to manage the Australian share of that allocation and to maximise the economic value of the resource whilst managing it sustainably.

The third key amendment is to the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 to facilitate the introduction of output controls and better fisheries management practices in fisheries and the introduction of new powers, with related offences: to issue licences that will enable persons to commercially fish without a boat; to regulate fish receivers through a licensing regime to ensure the total allowable catch is maintained under the output controls; to facilitate Indigenous commercial fishers’ compliance with the output control systems by requiring them to hold a master fisherman’s licence in certain circumstances, as is currently required for non-Indigenous commercial fishers; and to facilitate better compliance with output controls by permitting an infringement notice and demerit point scheme to be introduced by regulation.

The fourth amendment is to simplify the delegations in the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 to reflect current practice, to improve the licensing regime and to introduce identity cards for officers. The fifth amendment is to improve consistency with other legislative regimes including by introducing new search warrant procedures, a new power requiring a vessel to stop and developmental permits. The sixth amendment is to the Fisheries Levy Act 1984 to facilitate cost recovery against management plans consistent with Australian government policy. As levies are a form of taxation these amendments appear in a separate bill, as required by the Australian Constitution, which I will address later in this speech.

The seventh amendment is to the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984, the Fisheries Management Act 1991, the Fisheries Administration Act 1991 and the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 to bolster compliance and enforcement procedures. In relation to the improved fisheries management tools, the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill also amends the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and the Fisheries Administration Act of the same year to allow for more cost-effective monitoring of the fishing industry’s compliance with fisheries and environmental obligations. The amendments will complement the Securing our Fishing Future initiative and will assist the Australian Fisheries Management Authority to implement the ministerial direction made in November 2005.

The key amendments are: firstly, to the Fisheries Administration Act 1991 and the Fisheries Management Act 1991 to provide a clearer legal basis for the current observer program by expanding the Australian Fisheries Management Authority’s functions to cover the placement of observers on both Australian and foreign commercial fishing boats; and, secondly, to the Fisheries Administration Act 1991 and to the Fisheries Management Act 1991 to widen the Australian Fisheries Management Authority’s functions to enable the collection of information in addition to that required for the management of fisheries and as an adjunct to the Australian Fisheries Management Authority’s observer and compliance activities. This will facilitate improved information sharing between agencies engaged in compliance and law enforcement involving serious criminal activity. The type of information and who it can be shared with will be subject to a regulation made by the minister.

The Australian Fisheries Management Authority plays a key role in protecting Australia’s vast fishing zone from illegal foreign fishing, including conducting deterrence and apprehension activities in tropical, temperate and cold water regions. As such, the Australian Fisheries Management Authority is a major client of Coastwatch and works closely with the Australian Customs Service and the ADF. The Australian Fisheries Management Authority’s main program areas are in the northern regions, where Australia has adjoining marine interests with Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. In Northern Australia, incursions are largely made by fishers from Indonesia—the majority of whom are targeting shark, with a small number targeting reef fish and trepang. A small number of incursions have been made by vessels from Taiwan and PNG in the past.

In the Heard and McDonald Islands area, where Australia has a patagonian toothfish and mackerel icefish fishery, patrols have been conducted using a civil charter vessel—or, more recently, the Oceanic Viking, a Customs funded vessel—to provide surveillance coverage to deter illegal fishing operations by foreign vessels. The officers who patrol Australia’s fishing zone in tropical, temperate and cold water regions are to be commended for their effort in circumstances that can be exceedingly dangerous.

Indonesian fishing incursions in the Australian fishing zone result from a number of entrenched factors, including heavy fishing pressure in Indonesian waters resulting in stock depletion and loss of marine habitats. This has made fishing in Australian waters increasingly attractive to Indonesian fishers. Also, high international prices for fresh and live reef fish, among others, have resulted in unsustainable fishing practices by these villagers, including the destruction by blasting and poisoning of reefs. Returns from illegal fishing are high in comparison to those available to most local villagers in eastern Indonesia.

Interdepartmental discussions led by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have recognised the need to address the issue, which is a long-term risk, whilst continuing to maintain traditional enforcement action in Australia’s boundaries. Initiatives that have been implemented and/or planned include the printing and distribution of free maps and maritime boundaries, and working on AusAID and world development bank programs for developing alternative fisheries projects in Indonesia.

Other initiatives are visits by Australian Fisheries officers to Indonesian ports to advise on Australian measures and to discourage incursions, continued funding of visits to Australia by Indonesian officials to discuss bilateral approaches to the problem and new Australian initiatives such as propeller entrapment devices. In the longer term Australia will be seeking to strengthen Indonesia’s commitment to these bilateral agreements to take sanctions against operators who commit fisheries offences in Australian waters.

The Heard and McDonald Islands region is important both as a potentially long-term commercially valuable fishery for Australia and because of its international significance as the only unmodified example of a sub-Antarctic ecosystem in the world. Illegal fishing activity in the region threatens the established management regime, which is designed to achieve responsible fishing and to minimise the impact of fishing on the sensitive Antarctic marine ecology of the region and a direct challenge to Australian sovereignty over fisheries and protected heritage areas.

Illegal fishing boats are not fishing in accordance with requirements set down under the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. This could lead to long-term depletion of the stocks unless preventative action is taken. In addition, illegal boats could introduce diseases, exotic vegetation or animals that would devastate the pristine environment and adversely impact on Australia’s Heard and McDonald Islands listings.

In respect of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, illegal fishing in the southern oceans for patagonian toothfish increased dramatically during the late nineties and early noughties. With an increased Australian and French patrol presence over the last few years, illegal fishing in the Australian and French exclusive economic zones has been significantly reduced. The convention estimates that illegal, unregulated and unreported catch for all areas of the convention area in 2001-02 was 10,898 tonnes, compared with 7,599 tonnes in 2000-01 and 6,546 tonnes in 1999-2000.

One of the convention’s conservation measures adopted by member countries is the catch documentation scheme. The catch documentation scheme, as contained in the conservation measure, became binding on all Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources members on 7 May 2000. This enables the commission to identify the origin of toothfish entering the markets of all parties to the scheme and helps determine whether toothfish taken in the convention area were caught in a manner consistent with the convention. Specifically, the catch documentation scheme conservation measure requires vessel operators to complete a form which sets out certain information relating to the location of catches, amount of catches, ports of landing and transshipment.

In relation to combating illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, illegal fishing in Australia’s northern waters continues to pose serious threats. The Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 further develops the regime by strengthening the forfeiture of provisions in the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 so that the boat, catch and all equipment on foreign fishing boats engaged in illegal fishing in Australian waters are forfeit. The amendment also clarifies that the forfeiture may include any fish caught or equipment, including fuel and provisions, placed on board the boat after that offence. This amendment is a greater deterrent to illegal foreign fishers and will make it more difficult for foreign fishing boats to profit from illegal fishing.

The Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 further develops the regime to enable Australian authorities to more effectively prosecute new custodial offence provisions for illegal foreign fishing, which were introduced by the Fisheries Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fishing Offences) Act 2006, and by amending the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 to ensure that these foreign fishing offences can be effectively investigated and prosecuted using surveillance devices.

In respect of transitional governance arrangements, the amendment to the Fisheries Administration Act 1991 will give the minister a temporary power to appoint Australian Fisheries Management Authority directors for up to nine months at a time. It is intended that this power will be used to extend the terms of existing directors, which will expire on 30 June 2008 if the Australian Fisheries Management Authority does not become a commission on 1 July 2008.

In relation to the financial impact of the amendments, they are expected to involve additional administrative costs to the Australian government. Those costs relating to the Torres Strait fisheries are subject to cost-sharing arrangements with the Queensland government. No additional costs will be imposed on the Torres Strait fishers as a result of the amendments. There will be some additional costs and savings to fishers in the Australian fishing industry. Those fishers in fisheries for which observer coverage will be introduced or increased will incur this fee. As is current practice, the fees will be based on budgeted unit costs.

The streamlining of information-sharing provisions will improve administration, reduce duplication and avoid additional costs associated with the establishment of marine parks. A move towards cost recovery is consistent with Australian government and Torres Strait Island Protected Zone Joint Authority policy. These bills were developed by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in consultation with all relevant Australian government agencies. Amendments that have an impact on the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 and related legislation were developed through extensive and detailed consultation with Torres Strait fisheries licensees, native title prescribed bodies and industry. (Time expired)

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

in reply—I thank my colleague the member for Tangney, who has just concluded his remarks on these bills for the government, and also the member for Lingiari, who spoke earlier. They have both made contributions to the debate on the Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 and the Fisheries Levy Amendment Bill 2007. These bills contain important amendments to Commonwealth fisheries legislation, and I look forward to their passage through this House.

Given that there are other important bills that need to pass today, time is limited. But there were a couple of claims made by the member for Lingiari that I would particularly like to address. The member for Lingiari spent a good deal of his time criticising the Howard government for its efforts on illegal fishing. But, as Australians know, we have taken a tough approach to border security, and illegal foreign fishing is no exception. In the past three years alone, this government has committed over $800 million in new money—an absolutely unprecedented amount—to tackle illegal foreign fishing and the very serious threat that it poses to our fish stocks, our biosecurity and our national sovereignty. As a result, in the first four months of this year, sightings of illegal foreign fishing vessels in our northern waters were down 90 per cent on the same period in 2006—and 2006 was already 40 per cent down on 2005. We have achieved these results not only through the additional funding and hard work of our very efficient and effective border security agencies but also because the Howard government is prepared to take innovative approaches.

The introduction of the Triton, Customs new 98-metre armed trimaran, is one such example. Many Australians saw it cleaning up trochus poachers on Australia’s Ashmore Reef with clinical effectiveness on A Current Affair recently. I hasten to say that I do not really watch that program. I record here my congratulations to the men and women of the Triton, as well as all our border protection agencies, for the enormously important and difficult work they do. Speaking of the Triton, I was reminded during the member for Lingiari’s contribution of his now infamous press release following the government’s announcement of the tender for the Triton. He said of the vessel whose effectiveness has been so graphically displayed on A Current Affair that it showed a desperate lack of imagination on the part of the Australian government and was yet another admission of failure. He went on to say:

... they seem to think making over our highly professional Customs Service into a bunch of floating prison goons is going to do the trick.

I can tell you that what the Australian public saw the other night on national television was not a bunch of goons, as the member for Lingiari described them. The Australian public saw a bunch of dedicated and professional Australian officers doing very important work, very efficiently, in a dangerous environment, using the innovative assets that the Howard government has supplied them with. So on the one hand we have the Australian public seeing graphic evidence of the real contribution the Triton is making to the border security of this country and on the other we have the member for Lingiari, who thinks it is a failure and, presumably, that we should do away with it. It is no wonder that Australians are concerned about the consequences for border security should the Labor Party be elected.

I am pleased to report that in our southern waters the results are even better. As a result of the Australian government’s visionary $217 million Southern Ocean patrol program and our joint patrols arrangement we have been able to negotiate with the French, there has not been a single sighting of illegal patagonian toothfish poachers for at least two years in the case of our Macquarie Island exclusive economic zone and three years in our Heard and Macquarie islands exclusive economic zone. While the Howard government is very encouraged by these results, there is still much work to do. We are not about to rest on our laurels. We know the fight against illegal foreign fishing is an ongoing one and we need the strongest possible options available to us to defeat this international scourge. That is why we are introducing these laws to further strengthen our regime of deterrence against illegal foreign fishing.

I will also pick up on another point made by the member for Lingiari. At one point in his speech he made the rather bizarre claim that the Howard government is unfair and uncaring because $27 million from our unprecedented $220 million Securing our Fishing Future package has been scheduled to be spent in the 2007-08 financial year and not in 2006-07. I would like to inform the member for Lingiari that this shift in funding was actually in response to a request from industry that we extend the closing date for our onshore business assistance and fishing community assistance schemes. ‘Unfair and uncaring’? Is it unfair and uncaring to put aside $149 million to assist industry to adjust to difficult economic circumstances beyond their control? Is it unfair and uncaring for government to set aside almost $50 million to assist onshore businesses and communities to adjust to reduced fishing activity? Is it unfair and uncaring to provide $15 million in levy subsidies to the Commonwealth fishing fleet? The answer, of course, is no. An unfair and uncaring government would not have set aside $220 million in the first place.

The reality here is that the industry approached us, saying: ‘We are struggling. We know there are too many fishermen in some fisheries. We know that fish stocks need rebuilding in some fisheries. We know that there is no legal obligation on the Australian government to fund a restructure, but we are in desperate need of a restructure. We have no capacity to fund it ourselves and we would like you to fund it.’ An unfair and uncaring government would have said: ‘Go away. It is not our responsibility’—but not this government. The Howard government said to the industry: ‘We will help you. We know this kind of restructure money has never been offered before, we know it is unprecedented, but we will help.’ We set aside $220 million—the largest structural adjustment package ever offered to the Australian fishing industry—to decisively tackle the problem of too many fishermen chasing too few fish. We allowed those who wanted to get out to do so with some dignity, and we better positioned those who remained to be profitable. We did not do so because we were required to by law; we did so quite simply because we think the Commonwealth fishing industry has a fantastic future and it was the right thing to do.

I am pleased to say that the package has been almost universally welcomed. I say ‘almost universally’ very deliberately, because one group has conspicuously failed to support the package. The commercial fishing industry welcomed it, the recreational fishing industry welcomed it, the scientific community welcomed it, and the conservation sector welcomed it. I understand that even the Greens may have said positive things about it. But, quite conspicuously, there was one group that did not support it, and that was the Labor Party. Here we had the most important reforms in the history of Commonwealth fisheries to end overfishing, an unprecedented sum of money to assist the industry to restructure, everyone else thinking it was a great idea, and the Labor Party never even supported it.

Let me return to the substance of this legislation. As I informed the House when the bills were introduced, commercial fishing is a key economic activity for Torres Strait communities. This legislation will facilitate the resolution of longstanding concerns held by Torres Strait Islanders about resource allocation in the Torres Strait Protected Zone fisheries. It will enable the Protected Zone Joint Authority to establish management plans under which all parties will have a clear understanding of their access rights. Provisions in this legislation affecting the Torres Strait Protected Zone fisheries were drafted after an extensive process of consultation with all of those with an interest in the Torres Strait Protected Zone fisheries. This included the provision of comprehensive information to Torres Strait Islanders, especially those who hold a licence to fish for commercial purposes, to their representatives on the community fishers group, to Torres Strait native title prescribed bodies corporate—including relevant entities in the northern cape area—and to non-Indigenous commercial fishers and their representatives.

When I introduced this legislation into the House, I mentioned the importance of Queensland and the management of the Torres Strait Protected Zone fisheries. I can assure the member for Lingiari that the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, which administers various aspects of the Torres Strait Fisheries Act, has been comprehensively briefed and has provided valuable advice and comment. Unnecessary delays to the implementation of these bills will only serve to prolong the uncertainty for islanders and commercial fishers in the Torres Strait.

The legislation will enhance the monitoring of fishing activities in Commonwealth fisheries and facilitate the effective collection and sharing of information with environment and law enforcement agencies. This will be achieved through the introduction of a general head of power into the legislation. The details of how this exchange of information will occur will be provided in regulations, which will be the subject of consultation with the industry and are disallowable instruments and therefore subject to parliamentary scrutiny. These amendments will better protect Australia’s fisheries resources and will assist investigations concerning serious crime, border security, fisheries and wider marine monitoring and enforcement.

Additionally, the bills contain measures to deter illegal foreign fishers. Strong forfeiture and offence provisions in our fisheries legislation reflect the Australian government’s commitment to border protection and recognise the inherent violation of sovereignty caused by illegal fishing activities. These amendments will ensure Australia can continue to give strong messages to foreign fishers about the consequences of fishing illegally in our waters. The legislation also contains amendments which will complement the decision to make the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, known as AFMA, a commission in line with the outcomes of the Uhrig review. One of the key aims of this decision was to ensure that the new arrangements improve the governance of AFMA with minimal disruption to the fishing industry. The current amendments support those aims and will provide the minister with a temporary power to appoint AFMA directors for up to nine months at a time without running a selection process. This amendment will have no financial or operational impact on the fishing industry and will provide greater certainty over AFMA’s ongoing management during its transition to a commission.

In closing, can I clearly say to the opposition: this legislation is important. It will ensure that the Australian government is equipped with modern fisheries management tools as well as more robust enforcement, compliance and administrative systems to secure sustainable fisheries for future generations. It is necessary to progress reforms to ensure the sensible management of Torres Strait fisheries which the Queensland government and the Torres Strait Regional Authority have been actively involved in. It is also necessary to further strengthen Australia’s border protection regime against illegal foreign fishing. I thank members for their contribution to the debate and I urge the swift passage of this legislation through both houses.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.